Skip to content

Haiti a people struggling for their destiny

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument

The article argues that Haiti's recurrent cycles of mass protest and political instability are not episodic crises but the logical expression of a structurally dependent and internally weak capitalist state. The central claim is that the Haitian bourgeoisie, far from being an independent ruling class, functions as a parasitic intermediary for imperialist powers — principally the United States, international financial institutions, and the UN — and can only maintain itself through foreign military backing and the systematic looting of public resources. The current wave of protests, which began in July 2018 and escalated into demands for the overthrow of President Jovenel Möise, represents a popular insurrection against both the national ruling class and its imperialist masters. The article insists that no reformist solution is possible within the existing framework: the Haitian people must break with capitalism entirely, expel foreign interference, and establish a workers' and peasants' government.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis is grounded in the classical Marxist theory of the state, explicitly invoking Lenin's formulation that the state is "a special body of armed men defending the capital of a minority." This is applied concretely to the UN's MINUSTAH and successor missions, which are characterised not as peacekeepers but as the armed enforcers of imperialist property relations. The article also draws on the Marxist theory of combined and uneven development: Haiti's extreme vulnerability — its dependence on imported food, its subordination to IMF conditionalities, its alignment with US sanctions against Venezuela — is presented as the product of a century of imperialist domination that began with the 1825 indemnity imposed by France. The concept of a "weak, incompetent and parasitic" bourgeoisie, sustained only by foreign patronage, is a direct application of the Marxist analysis of comprador capital in the periphery. The article situates itself within the tradition of revolutionary Marxism that rejects the possibility of a "national bourgeois" developmental path in the era of late imperialism, and it draws historical parallels to the Venezuelan cacerolazo and the Bolivarian Revolution to underline the hemispheric significance of Haiti's struggles.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was written in early 2020, before the COVID-19 pandemic had fully struck Haiti, but the analysis is prescient about the country's structural fragility. The pandemic is noted as a catastrophic threat to a healthcare system already destroyed by decades of underinvestment and looting. The conjuncture is defined by several concrete factors: the 2018 fuel price hikes triggered by IMF-imposed austerity; the exposure of the $2 billion Petrocaribe embezzlement scandal linking Möise and former President Martelly; Haiti's withdrawal from the Petrocaribe agreement and realignment with US sanctions on Venezuela, which severed access to cheap oil and deepened the energy crisis; and the direct backing of Möise by the Trump administration as part of its anti-Venezuela policy. The article also notes the emergence of the Petrochallengers youth movement and the Peyi Lok (blocked country) tactic, which paralysed inter-provincial transit. The repression is quantified: 77 deaths in 2018 alone. The Core Group of foreign diplomats — representing the US, Canada, France, the EU, and others — is identified as the real political authority behind the puppet presidency. The article thus connects Haiti's internal crisis to the broader geopolitical realignments in Latin America and the Caribbean under US pressure.

Where the Argument Continues

The article is a snapshot of a rapidly unfolding situation and necessarily leaves several threads open. It does not develop a detailed programme for the transitional government it calls for, nor does it analyse the class composition of the protest movement — the relationship between urban workers, the peasantry, and the informal proletariat. The role of the Petrochallengers and the MDP is noted but not subjected to a sustained political critique: are they genuinely revolutionary or potentially reformist? The article also does not address the strategic question of how a general strike and popular insurrection can be sustained against a state that is both repressive and dependent on foreign military support. These questions are taken up in subsequent IDOM coverage of Haiti, including analyses of the assassination of Jovenel Möise in July 2021 and the subsequent power vacuum, as well as broader articles on the crisis of US imperialism in the Caribbean. Against the Stream episodes have also addressed the Haitian situation in the context of Latin American revolutionary waves and the debate on dual power.

Connections

  • Lenin, The State and Revolution — the theoretical foundation for the article's conception of the state as an instrument of class rule.
  • Trotsky, The History of the Russian Revolution — particularly the analysis of combined and uneven development, which is implicit in the article's treatment of Haiti's dependent capitalism.
  • C.L.R. James, The Black Jacobins — the classic Marxist history of the Haitian Revolution, which provides the historical backdrop for the article's claim that Haiti's revolutionary traditions remain alive.
  • IDOM articles on Venezuela and Petrocaribe — to understand the geopolitical context of Haiti's energy crisis and the impact of US sanctions.
  • IDOM articles on the IMF and debt imperialism — for a deeper theoretical treatment of the structural adjustment programmes that underpin the austerity measures described here.

Key Quotes

  1. "The Haitian bourgeoisie are in fact considerably weak, incompetent and parasitic; only sustained thanks to the support of their imperialist masters."

  2. "Lenin said that the state is a special body of armed men defending the capital of a minority. In Haiti, the military sent by the UN have been the international bullies that protect the businesses of foreign and national capitalists."

  3. "The billions of dollars announced in each emergency assistance programme or reconstruction are granted to international agencies that hire inexperienced and incapable people. Thus, the conditions of poverty and vulnerability of the population only become more acute under their care."

  4. "Möise's tenure in power can only be explained by an agreement established with Donald Trump and his anti-Venezuela policy, in addition to the support of the Core Group formed by diplomats from countries with interests in Haiti."

  5. "The solution of the crisis can only come from the Haitian people. Now, the masses must strengthen their level of popular organisation in the cities and in the countryside to face the misery of the prevailing capitalist system."

  6. "The international community, contrary to its official discourse of contributing to the development of Haiti, is one of the main factors that aggravates misery via the management of humanitarian assistance."